If a hadoop minor release line is EOL, we can drop its support in the next hbase minor release, but hadoop 2.10 is still a bit different comparing to other hadoop release line, as it is the last release line for hadoop2.
https://lists.apache.org/thread/nkrxx0glxz939162qrkc6d5nc72qxbfw This is the discussion thread in hadoop community, they are all agree to EOL 3.2.x, but for 2.10.x, they have concerns about EOL it too... So I think we'd better drop 3.2.x support for hbase 2.6.x, but still leave the hadoop2 profile as is. Once the hadoop community officially decides to EOL hadoop2 completely, we could discuss again. Thanks. Bryan Beaudreault <bbeaudrea...@gmail.com> 于2023年12月6日周三 23:21写道： > > Thanks for the input. > > My concern with waiting on hbase 3.x is that it's already been pending for > years, and comes with many big architectural changes. It will probably be a > risky upgrade for users, and we will end up supporting hbase 2.x for years > to come. This is probably a separate discussion, but I do wonder if we > should target a specific major release cadence (yearly) so that we can move > forward on deprecations, etc. Not every major release has to be huge > (ideally isn't). > > I agree we need to support hadoop-2.x for a while, but we can keep that > support in hbase 2.5. This is how we've handled other hadoop versions > according to our compatibility matrix. > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 1:53 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Better also send the email to user@hbase to see what our users think. > > > > I think we could change the default profile to hadoop3, but better > > still have the hadoop2 profile as there could still be users on > > hadoop-2.x. > > > > We will completely drop the hadoop2 support in hbase 3.x. > > > > Tak Lon (Stephen) Wu <tak...@apache.org> 于2023年12月6日周三 12:08写道： > > > > > > When Wei-Chiu and I were working on Ozone support via HBASE-27769, we > > asked > > > once when we could supporting hadoop-3.3+, the answer from Duo was HBase > > > community supports the oldest version of hadoop > > > https://hadoop.apache.org/releases.html (it was 2.10, 3.2.4 and 3.3.6). > > > > > > If this strategy remains and once 2.10 becomes EOL then HBase 2.6 should > > be > > > able to support 3.2.x and 3.3.x. At the same time, IMO 3.2.x is also an > > > inactive release version, we can discuss if we should just change our > > base > > > of hadoop to 3.3.6 maybe starting from HBase 3.0+ > > > > > > -Stephen > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 7:51 AM Bryan Beaudreault < > > bbeaudrea...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On the hdfs dev list, they are talking about EOL Hadoop 2.10 (and thus > > > > 2.x). They may cherry-pick back critical CVE fixes but not create any > > more > > > > releases. Of course, the decision is not final yet, but I wonder if we > > > > should make a similar decision for supporting 2.10 in hbase. > > > > > > > > Given that 2.6 is soon, we could mark the end of support in that > > release. > > > > While it may seem like a major change, there is some precedent for > > this. > > > > Looking at our compatibility matrix, we have dropped support for Hadoop > > > > releases in minor releases in the past. > > > > > > > > Dropping support for Hadoop 2 in HBase 2.6 would allow us to start > > cleaning > > > > up our POMs and some of the hacks we've had to do to reflect around > > Hadoop > > > > releases. It may also free up Jenkins capacity since we can turn off > > some > > > > builds for our primary branches. > > > > > >
